# Calculating Cameras Covering Tennis Courts?

A new member asked about using the calculator to cover / film on tennis courts. It's an interesting idea. Here is a sample calculation for a random tennis court in Miami:

He wants to film tennis practices and matches. Any tennis experts have better ideas on exact camera placement?!

John, I think I found a glitch in the Calculator. If you follow my link above, the highlighted camera defaults to 2.9mm, but I had it set to 4.9mm. I went back and changed it, retreived a new URL, edited my post, and even the new link changes the first camera to 2.9mm. I tried this with Chrome and Edge.

Jon, thanks. I confirmed it is a bug. It appears to be that the initial camera calls up does not recall its specific AoV, rather going to the app's default of 2.9mm

We will get it fixed today.

What's the budget? In dollars or camera count.

You main issue will be blur effects as the a 90° angle with the action, generates a maximum speed effect , so you will never see the ball (100 to 200 Km/h ) with standard camera

Better choose directly 60 fps models, and short GOP, which is unfortunately not possible with 180° lenses. WDR should be software based to avoid to slowdown the shutter speed

I would place more camera with short angles and long focal (30-50mm) from the opposite side, to get player from face during action.L

My suggestion: Go watch a tennis game covered by a TV channel and pay attention to camera positioning. I think this will be helpful to make up your mind.

Couldn't you just figure this out from watching TV coverage?

Yes, Jon, that would hlep as a start. But I still think that watching alive you will get a better spatial perception of the area to be covered and camera's positioning.

I'd have imagined that the ideal camera positioning would depend heavily on the reasons for recording the action: If the purpose was to watch as a spectator for pleasure, the nicest angle is probably where the umpire sits, seeing the faces of all players and being on average as close to the action as possible without getting in the way. In this case a 180° camera would be the best for a fluid watching experience, but it might become dull after watching from the same angle for some time, and the current technology doesn't yet support sports speeds, at least in terms of frame rate.

If, on the other hand, the purpose is for analysis of the players, the ball, lines, or other technical aspects, point views for specific locations would always yield the sharpest results, but more cameras will usually cost more, at least in terms of installation, and watching the action smoothly from several angles will be much more complicated.

Are there any further guidelines available on the requirements?